Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8186153" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Maybe you are refering to something I don't understand, but "retrospectively" is "with regards to the past". And this rule doesn't change the past rules. Like you said, there are two systems right now. They aren't going to change the old system. They aren't going to remove the racial ASIs from anything already printed. Going forward, they will be doing designs like this, but that is why I think this whole discussion has been largely missing the point. We aren't discussing Tasha's, that option exists, it was published and fighting about whether it should be published is misplaced. We are discussing these lineages, so all the discussion about whether a halfling should have a +2 strength is pointless. The PHB doesn't give that. Tasha's does. That is all established. Should a Hexborn be allowed to have a +2 strength is the content we are discussing. Perhaps we can discuss "should all future DnD 5e lineages be designed in this manner?" but thinking about the races "missing" from 5e... I can only think of the Thr-Kreen as a major race that isn't supported, and as I pointed out, the "kreen" is a race with many variants, so could easily fit into this new design. Elves, Halflings, Minotaurs, Humans, Dragonborn, Orcs, Goblins, Kobolds, Humans, Dwarves, Tritons, Yuan-ti, Tielfings, Aasimar, Genasi, Gnomes, Aarcrockra, Kenku, Tabxi, Shifters, Changelings, Warforged, Lizardfolk, Goliaths, Firbolg... discussing all of these is fairly irrelevant, because they are already printed under the old system, and are covered under Tasha's as an optional system. If you want to argue that Tasha's is a bad option for the game, feel free, but it was printed and exists and that is basically that. Nothing in this UA changed any of that.</blockquote>

Verification